Sunday, December 15, 2019

The Tony Blair approach to making an independence referendum happen

By all means I think we should go through the formal process of demanding a Section 30 order and giving the defeated Tories a few days or weeks to squirm.  But I hope the one thing we'd all agree on is that when the "no" inevitably comes, we can't afford to follow Mhairi Hunter's preferred approach, ie. we can't say "thank you kindly for your gracious consideration, guvnor, we accept your decision", and then seek yet another mandate in two years' time, and then when that mandate is ignored say "thank you kindly for your gracious consideration, guvnor, we accept your decision", and so on into infinity.  There has to be a reckoning sooner or later.

I'm reminded of Tony Blair's approach to another intractable problem twenty years ago.  Shortly after becoming Prime Minister in 1997, he tried to resuscitate the Northern Ireland peace process by making a speech in which he addressed Sinn Fein directly.  "The talks train is leaving the station.  I want you on that train, but it is leaving anyway."  Perhaps surprisingly, he was praised for his forthrightness of language by the UUP leader David Trimble, who had hitherto been very reluctant to accept any Sinn Fein involvement, and less than a year later the miracle happened and the Good Friday Agreement was signed.

So I'd like to hear Nicola Sturgeon eventually say: "An independence referendum is taking place in the autumn of 2020.  We want it to take place with the agreement of both governments, but it is taking place anyway.  If you want to stop it, we'll see you in court, and remember there'll be TV cameras there to record your lawyer's explanation that the UK is a prison from which Scotland is not permitted to escape by any democratic means."

If that isn't the plan, I hope there's an equally good one.  But I just have this slight nagging worry that people close to the SNP leadership may think it's 1987 all over again, and that all they have to do to make independence the settled will of the Scottish people is hang around for ten years, just as devolution became the settled will of the Scottish people over the period between 1987 and 1997 after the arrogance of Tory rejectionism weaved its magic.  The trouble with waiting patiently for history to repeat itself is that it has an unerring habit of darting off in a different direction entirely.  In any case, Brexit is an emergency situation and we can't afford to wait a decade this time.

85 comments:

  1. Playing devils advocate

    Boris says 'go ahead, have a referendum but I'll instruct the members of the Conservative party in Scotland to boycott it and I'm sure my pro UK friends in Labour and the Lib Dems will follow suit.'

    'Our members and supporters in Scotland will officially boycott it, good luck getting that result accepted in any international political arena'

    And he'll be right no one would even countenance the result from such a vote.

    If you want to have a referendum, it has to be agreed by everyone and the whole people of Scotland have to take part.

    If we're using the Tony Blair handbook you'd have more luck claiming Johnson has WMD's ready to use against us.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. "If you want to have a referendum, it has to be agreed by everyone and the whole people of Scotland have to take part."

      Rubbish. The 1970s border poll in Northern Ireland was boycotted by the nationalist side, but the result was still upheld. In any case, you're missing the point entirely - we wouldn't be taking our case to "the international political arena" unless we had just declared UDI, and that's categorically *not* what I'm suggesting.

      Delete
    2. James Kelly thanks for making this point as I was just about to. Lost track of how many times I have made this point. The UK set a precedent in N. Ireland when they accepted the result. The precedent is - if you don't vote tough.

      Delete
    3. I remember the Irish border poll. It was legal and boycotted by the Irish/Nationalist/Republicans. The outcome was obvious. The IRA at that time thought they could win their war but forgot the British Army could replace their dead by tenfold if required. However it still seems strange that the Irish who fought the British and initially voted against the EU want to be dominated by the EU. All those deaths for nothing methinks. Perhaps money in the pockets of the elites has done it. Ireland like the UK still has unacceptable poverty and the rich are coining it in. Unfortunately the likes of Sinn Fein are also coining it in so their will be no armed struggle on behalf of the poor, only petty nationalism.

      Delete
    4. 'we wouldn't be taking our case to "the international political arena" unless we had just declared UDI, and that's categorically *not* what I'm suggesting.'

      Sure, the EU and Spain will be over the moon that we just decided to hold our own referendum without London agreement and they'll keep quiet with nothing to say except 'Welcome'.

      Thats the International Community James, they'll have plenty to say on the issue.

      Delete
    5. You're just not listening. You're still implying that I am suggesting UDI. For a second time: I am categorically *not* suggesting UDI. Clear?

      Delete
    6. GWC talks a lot of shite that's why he is the sites Britnat turd.

      Delete
  2. This debate seems rather two dimensional whereas we live in a three dimensional world, if you catch my drift.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I don't catch your drift, if I'm being honest.

      Delete
    2. The forth dimension, time, is most important of all.

      Delete
    3. I live in a world of five dimensions. I am very clever and special. If you get my drift.

      Delete
  3. It looks like Scottish Labour are now going to endorse the referendum. As much as they are minnows in the Scottish parliament. They still carry 20% of the electorate. To me even if another 5% of their supporters switch to indi , it's a game changer.

    I doubt even Boris can ignore the juggernaught of independence.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Although it's intriguing to think of some Labour politicians reconsidering their positions, more interesting if this is a tip of a larger iceberg of what (ex) Labour voters may be thinking...

      Delete
  4. He will and it is legal. The Labour opportunists if any will be sussed and kicked out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kicked out of what.....the Englidh Labour Party? There are a lot of Scots Labour supporters who will switch to the SNP before ever considering a Thatcherist regime from London and a few Lib Dems who won't support Brexit and will support the SNP. The Unionist mantra that 55% of Scots are Unionists doesn't wash anymore. Pamela Nash continues to sound like an old politician who can't get over getting skelped by the up and coming reality. Independence doesnt get dictated from WM....it's born in Scotland and nurtured here until it becomes inevitable.

      Delete
    2. Scottish Labour turncoats should leave and join the Nat sis. They are failures so the Nat sis are welcome to have more failures. Boris is our leader and we are leaving the EU dictatorship. NOW set your clock and sign on tomorrow.

      Delete
    3. Well no it's not. Scots law says the people are sovereign and international law protects self determination. The UK is signed up to both.

      Upwards of 60 countries have left Westminster rule, by one means or another, and many of them still have the scars, or still enthusiastically celebrate it annually.

      The UK is too scared to lay a finger on Ireland because of their friends abroad, and when the Brits try and occupy Scotland, they'll be put in their place.

      Delete
    4. International Law is non existent. Self determination is determined by those who can make most money.

      Delete
    5. Or the British running away in the face of a few angry natives, as per the all the former colonies, Ireland included.

      Delete
    6. "Self determination is determined by those who can make most money."

      So you're saying -- 'Don't rule Wingsy out'?

      Delete
  5. Unionist Media BDSM ClubDecember 15, 2019 at 11:32 PM

    Offer London 50% of oil and gas revenues in exchange for independence. Call their bluff about Scottish subsidy junkies. Tell them it’s worth us paying between £10 billion and £13billion a year to be free of London control (UK oil and gas revenues £25billion last year).

    Rejoin the EU and avoid the 6.4% crash in GDP coming with Johnson’s Brexit. https://www.cnbc.com/2019/10/18/johnsons-brexit-deal-is-worse-for-the-uk-economy-than-mays-research-suggests.html
    Amount saved: £11.5billion a year.

    Results achieved:

    1. Independence at zero financial cost compared to what’s coming anyway.
    2. Repeat: INDEPENDENCE AT ZERO FINANCIAL COST COMPARED TO WHAT’S COMING ANYWAY.
    3. All legal and political barriers bypassed.
    4. Provides leverage to to keep London honest during independence negotiations.
    5. Provides leverage to keep London honest during the early years of independence.
    6. It’s win-win, civilised, cooperative rather than confrontational, and keeps England’s imperial pride from being hurt, helping with 3. and 4.
    7. It’s an offer that exudes extreme confidence about Scotland’s economy post-independence.
    8. The Yoon gollems get to see how much they really matter to London.
    9. Again: INDEPENDENCE AT ZERO FINANCIAL COST COMPARED TO WHAT’S COMING ANYWAY.

    (To get Machiavellian/Dom Cummingsian about it, the offer wouldn’t even have to be honoured. Make the offer, keep making it, get English support for Scottish independence rising to 60% (£120billion per decade from the subsidy junkies!) and then play it by ear).

    In our own lives intractable legal issues are often settled by cold hard cash. Why should this be any different? And due to Brexit, we have an opportunity to do this without it costing us a thing.




    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oil revenue was not £25 billion last year, not even close.
      https://www.statista.com/statistics/350890/united-kingdom-uk-north-sea-revenue/
      Even under the most optimistic predictions in the 2014 white paper north sea revenue was only ever forecast to be 7.9 billion so not sure were you got 25billion from.

      Secondly the GDP reduction is 6.4% lower is by 2034. At a average reduction per year that is 0.42% per year, so again you would not be saving 11.5billion per year, it would be roughly 75 million a year at the start.

      So your scenario is 30ish billion out which is almost the total Scottish budget. Honestly if you are trying to make an economic argument for independence try and make it remotely accurate

      Delete
    2. Unionist Media BDSM ClubDecember 16, 2019 at 1:52 PM

      "Secondly the GDP reduction is 6.4% lower is by 2034. At a average reduction per year that is 0.42% per year, so again you would not be saving 11.5billion per year, it would be roughly 75 million a year at the start.

      “So your scenario is 30ish billion out which is almost the total Scottish budget. Honestly if you are trying to make an economic argument for independence try and make it remotely accurate."

      You must be assuming that the proposal above would begin almost immediately. It clearly couldn't. Five years would be the earliest such a thing could start (and therefore five years into Brexit). All other avenues would be explored first. We're into Plan F territory here. I thought that was a given. Apologies if that wasn’t clear.

      "Oil revenue was not £25 billion last year, not even close.
      https://www.statista.com/statistics/350890/united-kingdom-uk-north-sea-revenue/"

      This is correct. The £25 billion figure is the total value, not govt revenue. My buttocks are currently raw and bleeding from self-flagellation over this mistake (can send pix).

      But of course your lower figures make this proposal even better for Scotland, not worse. In fact, the eventual disparity between North Sea revenue and GDP lost due to Brexit would be so great that Scotland could offer London 100% of that revenue in exchange for independence and still be considerably better off than in the Union.

      The big question obviously is how accurate those Brexit predictions are. But we’d have the next few years to judge that.

      Interesting to see Gove now acknowledge that that North Sea revenue is all that interests London. Revised proposal, then, if the Brexit guesses prove roughly accurate: offer London 100% of oil and gas money in exchange for independence and end up not just no worse off, but actually *better off* than we’d be under Brexit.

      Merry Christmas!

      Delete
    3. Unionist Media BDSM ClubDecember 16, 2019 at 1:56 PM

      "Interesting to see Gove now acknowledge" = "Interesting to see that Gove acknowledged"

      Delete
    4. The Treaty of Union can be deemed illegal. The English Parliament did not dissolve its self as required by the Treaty. The Scottish Parliament did.

      Delete
    5. Scotland take on taxes on oil and gas would be similar to Norway's.
      We have much the same production. We don't have a Tory Government giving it away to their pals.

      Delete
    6. The English Parliament dissolved after the Treaty of the Union, honestly what is it with people making up such basic stuff.

      Delete
  6. GWC: the Irish won. It was the IRA that proved they could just replace the dead. Sinn Fein just keeps winning seats. The Border was a disaster. It allowed SF to seem the High Road and allowed them to infiltrate the police.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I get your point about Irish women replacing the dead they could beat the Muslims hands down for shaggin. The Irish women helped create the famine. Too many weans an not enough spuds. But blame the English for their lifestyles. And we have global warming to contend with.

      Delete
    2. You use language like this and seriously consider yourself a socialist? Your ignorance of Scottish and Irish history is nearly as great as your overall ignorance. John McLean would spit in your face if he was still here.

      Delete
    3. GWC the resident Britnat turd.

      Delete
  7. I think of more pressing concern would be just to get the section 30 power devolved to Scotland, an agreement that we won't exercise the power until 2021 assuming we win it.

    We do need a brexit fallout to occur in order to get above 50%

    ReplyDelete
  8. The SNP better get its collective act together asap. Boris has signalled the intention to redraw the electoral boundaries. This pretty well guarantees that Scotland will be reduced to a small rump of seats except for the Tory supporting Borders and Aberdeen area. I think this is going to take the guts to stand up to WM and demand Indeyref2 or hold a referendum without WM permission followed by a declaration of independence. Then let the UN sort out the rest of it.

    ReplyDelete
  9. Exactly, James. Are we going to be listening to Ian Blackford making great speeches at WM in 2022 about how Scotland's voice really must be respected? The time for business as usual is over.

    ReplyDelete
  10. The break-up of the UK is absolutely in the interests of the EU, if simply because they could spend 5 years negotiating a trade deal which covers Scotland, only for this to be torn up by an incoming Lab + SNP administration in 2024. They will ask Johnson what guarantees he has here.

    Whether Scotland and NI are are part of the UK in a few years is actually pretty central to trade negotiations. If Johnson wants to guarantee the Jocks will be safely locked up, he needs to say he'll cancel the next few UK elections somehow too. And be prepared to enforce all this with jackboots if needed. Such things are normally low risk in negotiations, but for the UK, especially right now, it's a major problem.

    Scotland militarily is highly strategic too (it's the gateway to the N. Atlantic), never mind the fishing waters. Better it was a friendly member rather than part of an aggressive rival.

    Then there's the fishing, oil, gas, power....

    Former soviet states and Ireland will be sympathetic to Scotland being bullied by dictatorial larger neighbour... Most of Europe knows what it's like to have foreign powers aggressively control you too. One veto and it's no deal for Boris. No matter how much I sympathise with the Catalans, their situation is not the same as Scotland, the ancient country and nation that plays at the world cup and is part of the UK 'freely'.

    These are countries that play us at international football; they don't think we're an uppity region. They see us as a country. One they visited, maybe worked in, and still have the jimmy hat. They remember how we had a vote and almost left the union we are in back in 2014. The presumption is that we are in this union through free choice. That's what Britain said to the world then. It said it was a democracy, that Scotland was a nation, a country and Scots were proud, free members of the UK. The sympathy for Scots is huge in the EU and beyond, far more than a small 'region' in the same position could hope for. Some sympathetic Irish/Scots senators in the USA and no trade deal for Boris, just the like the backstop.

    I fear a Section 30 refusal for good reason. It would mean the UK has genuinely put on the swastika armband and was prepared to not give a crap about all the above issue, come what may. It would be a very dark situation, not only for us, but for all the peoples of the UK. If Scottish democracy is being ended, well, the welsh will be facing the same and the English should get ready for being next.

    As the UK is leaving the EU, the 27 will be much more relaxed about giving their opinions here. No special favours for non-members.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Major General Trixie La BogcheDecember 16, 2019 at 7:53 PM

      You are profoundly boring. If I lived near you, I would hide every time I saw you coming. And I never want to see that. Ooh, matron! Our Staveley's just said mucky things.

      Delete
  11. I think Young James has had his wings clipped. That burd has taken her camera back. She controls the means of production.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Major General Trixie La BogcheDecember 16, 2019 at 7:55 PM

      You know where she put her camera, don't you? Ladycave.

      Delete
  12. James is OK but now I'm fighting back.


    Scottish Union Party (SUP)
    ‏ @Scottish_UParty

    The political scene in Scotland has to change to take on the SNP. We are forming a political party that unifies the vote of Labour, Lib Dem’s and Conservatives in Scotland. Fighting for Scotland’s best interests with the Great British Union. Come join us

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. GWC

      Is your party going to be called the Great Britnat Turd party. Your union stinks.

      Delete
    2. I won't be SUPping at your table

      Delete
  13. I remember Michael Gove saying Scotland can be Independent when the oil and gas runs out, let's see what the Nats say about Independence then
    The UK invested in the oil and gas industry not Scotland he says

    Amazing the brass neck how they bandy this UK place about as if Scotland has never paid into the damn thing
    One thing's for sure Michael Gove believes it's about oil, so there's your answer, instead of saying the tried and tested worthless oil garbage they admit openly it's all about Scotlands wealth and they're keeping it

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The UK invested nothing in the oil and gas industry. if they had, like Norway, they would not be as hard up.

      Delete
  14. This is exactly what I mean.

    No country can force another to recognise its independence. A Section 30 is not 'permission', it's recognition of the outcome. Acceptance of it.

    Without a Section 30 the referendum would still be legal and Scotland would legally move to independence. Unless England moved to stop it, either with jackboots, or by trying to prevent Scotland being able to function properly within the international system.

    Spain chose the jackboots as that's the only solid option if you want to ensure you keep control (if you can call it that).

    https://twitter.com/ChrisMusson/status/1206510557341396992

    Chris Musson

    Verified account
    nd m
    @ChrisMusson
    19m19 minutes ago
    More Chris Musson Retweeted Sky News
    SNP MP Stewart Hosie: “We don’t need a Section 30 order to have *a* referendum. But the Section 30 order is important because it then commits both sides to accept the result."


    Is England really going to force Scots to start a Martin Luther King style civil rights movement demanding they be give the very basic right of simply being allowed to vote? 'Scots lives matter' placards in the stands and yellow solidarity armbands on the Scotland international team when it plays abroad? What happens at the commonwealth games? I imagine india and many other former colonies that the English shot at would be quite sympathetic to Scotland's plight when England comes asking for a trade deal.

    What happens if the Scottish grand committee votes to withdraw from Westminster? Then any mandate for Westminster rule of Scotland vanishes as it is not represented there. Democracy is rule by consent. A parliament cannot democratically rule a land which has withdrawn from it.

    I suspect we shall have our referendum. If we don't, all peoples of the UK should be very, very worried, for their right to vote is under threat.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm sure many of the former colonies will remember their history with Scotland, after all if they go to Edinburgh they will see the Melville Monument and wondering why Scotland has a monument of a man who is recognised of being why slavery was not abolished sooner.

      Or they will be told how Walter Scot referred to India as the corn chest of Scotland. They will know of course that Scots at the time made up only 9% of the British population but accounted for 25% of the people ruling Colonial India. Or how they owned 32% of the Slaves in Jamaica; remembering how there slave descendants were often made to dress in tartan to remind their Scots owners feel more at home.

      In fact I would image one of the first things a Indy Scotland will be under pressure to do is apologize for its Colonial past.

      So lets drop this pretence that colonisation was all 'England' When the Empire crumbled countries were celebrating getting rid of Scots as much as they were the English

      Delete
    2. On a side note i'm glad to see the SNP saying that a section 30 is not required for a referendum, I therefore look forward to the Scot Gov shortly telling us when that referendum will be

      Delete
    3. September 2020 is the proposed date for Scotlands Independence referendum to be verifed and passed at final committee stage before Christmas

      Delete
    4. Erm, Sir Walter Scott was British. He's also dead, as are most of those who ran the empire and supported it from these parts.

      This is obvious.

      Scots who have never backed the union or its Empire are (or were) by contrast just Scots. Today, indy is for the (first and foremost) Scots, the union is for brits (in whole or in part).

      The empire is nothing to do with Scots like me any more than it's to do with those from india who didn't collaborate with the British, for there were many in the colonies that did.

      However, those who would stop Scotland becoming independent by trying to block a referendum are the same as those who tried to put down Ghandi’s movement by force.

      Be well to remember that denial of a referendum and you start to make martyrs of the SNP. Is that really what the brits want to do? Turn Sturgeon into a Scottish Ghandi?

      Delete
    5. The gross hypocrisy of the unionists is comical.

      You jocks are not allowed a referendum as we English run this show!

      But you are to blame for the empire!

      Lol.

      Delete
    6. Only a British government is obliged to apologise for the actions of the British empire, just as it's obliged to pay British debts etc. It can't have it's cake and eat it.

      However, it would be good for an indy Scottish government to apologise for the past actions of British unionists from Scotland who supported the empire and what it did.

      Scots like myself, who have never supported the UK, have nothing to apologise for but the actions of some of our countryfolk.

      Delete
    7. All this about apologise. Every body in the world would have to apologise for deeds done by their fore bearers.

      Delete
    8. Major General Trixie La BogcheDecember 16, 2019 at 7:58 PM

      I apologise for farting when Winston Churchill died. Couldn't help it. I'd just polished off some beans on toast. They were a luxury during the Winston Death Throes. Oops ... Prrrrrooooop. There goes another one... I suppose the queen's just popped her clogs. ... Prrrrrooooop - there goes Phil the Greek.

      Delete
  15. Despite Stuart Campbells best efforts to disuade folk from voting SNP they ignored him and voted SNP
    Campbells new strategy for SNP hating is that they should *Dae Sumthin*

    Not really sure what he's advocating here but very Nigel Farage of him to attempt to encourage folk to give him more money for a political party that doesn't exist with a policy of *Dae Sumthin*

    Scots didn't fall for Farage's stunts, Campbell will no doubt go the same way, maybe that's why he's so bitter

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Did he try to dissuade them? He said as I recall not long before the election "For clarity if I was living in Scotland I would vote SNP in 56 of the 59 constituencies". There were three candidates he didn't like. I can't recall which ones or why but I'm guessing it was something to do that tedious self identification issue.

      Hardly a exhortation to vote anybody but SNP.

      He wants an Indy ref. We all do. I think he should be more patient but it's his website. When the balloon goes up he will deliver on the WBB2. We will use it.

      Delete
    2. Farage claimed he wanted an Independent Englandy Britain but he has no intention of living in it
      Where does Stuart Campbell live again and why is it so important to him when he doesn't live in Scotland

      It was more than three MPs that Campbell was moaning about it was the whole SNP set up under his latest enemy the FM funnily enough just like Farage when he complained about how the Tories weren't doing it right and he could do it better

      To be fair even though I can't stand the man Farage has better manners than Campbell, at least he doesn't fill the internet with foul expletives at anyone who happens to disagree with him

      Campbell as leader of a political party? the guy's not right

      Delete
    3. If Stuart Campbell is the Farage of independence then who is the Jo Swinson?

      Delete
  16. I never said that Scotland was to blame for the Empire, you just lied about that. I said that the myth that Scots did not pillage the countries of the empire of there natural assets and enslave their populations is incorrect.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Erm, Brits did the pillaging.

      If someone in Scotland supported the union and empire they were a Brit. If they didn't, they were a Scot ('little Scotlanders' and 'little Englanders' opposed the Empire / Union).

      This is the classic Andy Murray argument you are using.

      If you want to add the word Scot to make it 'Brit-Scot', then you must at least agree with an immediate Section 30. We can't add the word Scot unless there's consent to the union involved. No section 30 means England is the decision maker means no Scot of any type can be held responsible for the actions of the empire as the scots are not in it freely.

      Delete
    2. Before the union, Scotland pillaged England, England pillaged Scotland. That what happened in these times.

      Delete
  17. The Empire was run by Westminster in London England for the Benefit of England. If some Scot British jumped on the bandwagon and enriched themselves by murdering, looting and enslaving across the globe just as Indian British collaborating with the Empire then that does not change the fact that it was under the control of the Monarch from London and the Westminster establishment.

    The real scandal today is the lack of truth about the Empire in the UK and its glorification. An example being handing out British Empire gongs as honours. How can you be honoured to accept a gong that glorifies murder, looting and enslavement.


    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. There would not have been an Empire without the Jockos and the fixed bayonet. Take a walk around the second city of the Empire, Glasgow and look up at the buildings.

      Delete
    2. GWC is a member of the British Empire.

      In a very small sort of way.

      Delete
  18. Scotland absolutely should apologise for the actions of past Scots. Being for Scottish independence doesn't equate to believing that Scots are in some way more moral than anyone else.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I'm not responsible for the actions of (imperialist type) Brits from Scotland, past and present.

      But I do apologise for their unpleasant behavior a lot when abroad.

      Less so now that I travel on an Irish passport.

      Delete
    2. Do love the way that nationalists separate Scots (dictionary definition a person born in or native to Scotland) into Brits and Scots.

      This is of course a common trait used by hard core nationlists, the Nazis used this method as well (aryan and non aryan Germans)


      Delete
    3. I like to refer to Brit (and other) imperialists as "patriots of nowhere". (And if they claim to be world citizens then they haven't done much to sort out climate change.)

      Then there's the concept of false consciousness.

      Delete
    4. "Do love the way that nationalists separate Scots (dictionary definition a person born in or native to Scotland) into Brits and Scots."

      Erm, this is how the British census does things.

      https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-24302914

      According to the UK government census records, I am Scottish (only) in my identity, a Scottish national by birth (birth certificate) and 'UK citizen' (see passport).

      So it seems it's you that are arguing the UK government is Nazi. Personally, I think it's just standard for a census, particularly in a multi-country union.

      Delete
    5. You are the one making the distinction
      "If someone in Scotland supported the union and empire they were a Brit. If they didn't, they were a Scot"

      Of course someone's political views (if they support independence or not) makes no difference to their nationality. Only hard core nationalists do this.

      Delete
    6. Obviously, as I've never voted for the UK / for a UK party, I am responsible for none of it's actions.

      If you have, then you are e.g. in part responsible for the persecution of the Chagos islanders.

      With voting comes responsibility. Vote wisely in light of this, and accept your vote has effects for which you are responsible.

      Delete
    7. That's great has nothing to do with the fact that someones political views makes no difference to their nationality.

      Delete
    8. Sure, but very obviously, I was talking about national identity / the way people vote.

      There were many Scots against the union and the Empire. They were Scottish, not British, in their political / national identity. Just like I am today.

      The Brits from Scotland were the ones that waved the union jack and sang about the empire ruling the waves. Again, just like today.

      Delete
    9. Nope You can support the union and feel completely Scottish. Its perfectly possible to be proud to be Scottish support a Union, they are not mutually exclusive. Nationalists tend to be too narrow minded to work this out through.

      Delete
    10. I've finally puzzled this conundrum out. That Scottish feeling is when the other 195 independent nations in the world make their own mind up about stuff and we get directed what to do by a government we didn't vote for. How Scottish is that.

      Delete
  19. The ROI made a few bob out of the paddy passport racket. Me and the Mrs are eligible as our respective grandfather's were paddies. My Mrs is applying.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I have a thing about Jair Bolsonaro in uniform.

      Delete
  20. Rabid British nationalists and their Empire2.0. Bless.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Young James is silent. He may have been camera-whipped.

    ReplyDelete
  22. GWC is a dodgy dosser.

    ReplyDelete
  23. Aye there is a lot of Tories n Yoons that didnae vote but then they didnae even Ken thier ane names. It is called the Postal Vote but you can only get off with that fraud once or maybe twice if the SNP don't scrutinise it.

    ReplyDelete
  24. Random Totty From Freedom SquareDecember 16, 2019 at 6:16 PM

    Vote for Me as the Depute Leader of SGP.

    I will be the power behind the throne.

    ReplyDelete
  25. It's good to see there are fair minded unionists who believe in democracy.

    https://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-50808996

    These will be crucial in securing Scotland's independence.

    Let them come and welcome them to the side of democracy, for they are starting to see the true nature of the union, and that will be a hard think to take for some.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Labour are looking for a Marxist transgender black Jewish agnostic as next leader. You can join the party for three pounds. Go for it Skier.

      Delete
    2. Skier, we would be well out of the EU by now except for the fair minded so called Democrats of all parties that would not accept democracy.

      Delete
    3. You mean the democracy of 62 % voting to remain?

      Delete